Mission: Space No G-Force Update

Thursday, May 18, 2006 1:15 PM
Hey guys, I think some information is needed here on the new version of M:S. This new tamer version will be available May 19th, TOMORROW. The single rider line will be dropped and everything M:S currently has for lines will be doubled. There will be one dedicated line for the Green Team (non-spinning) and one line for the Orange Team (spinning). Fastpass will be set up for both and they will share one line. You will be given cards to hold on to for each experience and you must give these cards to the CMs to ride. This has been done to prevent line switching and prevent kids too short for the Orange Team go into line for the Green Team then jump on over.

The Green Team experice will be similar to the Orange Team experice, only with no spinning they have increased the movement of the capsuels when they tilt, pitch, and roll. From what I hear it's not shabby at all and really well done. Orange Team will remain the same.

From what I hear the ride will adjust depending on demand, so if there are very few who want to ride Green, more Orange centerfuges will be made available, and vice versa.

+0
Thursday, May 18, 2006 1:52 PM
Who was it that was arguing that updating an attraction was a monumental process? This sounds like it happened pretty quickly and sounds like it will be pretty well managed.

I'll miss the single rider line, though.

+0
Thursday, May 18, 2006 3:23 PM
Disney is pretty organized so that doesn't surprise me. Spend a few hours in one of their parks and it's obvious those people know exactly what they're doing.
+0
Thursday, May 18, 2006 3:55 PM
I'd add a qualifier to that. "Disney World" is pretty organized.

I recently visited Disneyland Paris and was shocked to see that they can screw up a concept as simple as FastPass. At their latest attraction, Buzz Lightyear, the FastPass ticket issue queue stretched out and blocked the main path between the castle and Discoveryland. For Space Mountain, it took a 15 minute queue to get FastPass tickets, and another 30 minutes in the FastPass Return queue (with no queue ropes and rampant line-jumping). After witnessing that fiasco, I have a lot more respect for the crews in Florida. WDW, keep doing that thing you do!

+0
Thursday, May 18, 2006 7:32 PM
WDW's crowd control is TOP NOTCH, no doubt. I was disappointed with Disneyland's crowd control both times I've been out on the left coast.

It's amusing watching non-Disney parks try to do crowd. Cedar Point is especially amusing before the Summer Sucktacular (or whatever the heck it's called now). One guy with a blinking flashlight waving in three different directions between Dragon's Lair and the CP&LE RR station is not adequate crowd control.

+0
Thursday, May 18, 2006 8:23 PM

Michael Darling said:
Who was it that was arguing that updating an attraction was a monumental process?

That's exactly what I was thinking! *** Edited 5/19/2006 12:28:11 AM UTC by Peabody***

+0
Thursday, May 18, 2006 8:42 PM
Yeah, I know about that a bit, I'd like to explain myself again.

The intensity of the spinning has not been dropped, instead it has been eliminated. If the intensity of the spinning was decreased, the film would need to change. The G forces are created during acceleration, and by slowing down the centerfuge you'd have a shorter launch, thus meaning you'd have to edit the movie.

Sorry about the headache earlier, I didn't mean that this plan would take long, instead that any change in the intensity of a spinning version of the ride would take a long time.

+0
Thursday, May 18, 2006 9:38 PM

and by slowing down the centerfuge you'd have a shorter launch,

No, you'd have a less intense launch. There was a video taken "through the cracks" of a centrifuge in motion posted on wdwmagic. That thing gets up to full rotational speed in a hurry, and after that it's fairly constant. (I'm a little surprised that no one mentions a sense of yaw during the very beginning of lanuch; it gets up to speed *that* fast!)

ETA: you can time the rotational velocity pretty accurately because the cabins helpfully have little green lights on them. Just like the chalk mark on a timing belt!

Even if the centrifuge were accelerating in the rotational plane during the entire launch, you can have a less intense launch with the same duration by slowing down the rotational acceleration so you hit the maximum (slower) speed at the same time in the new configuration as you would have hit the faster speed in the old configuration.

This assumes a fairly well-controlled motor, but from what I can tell, this thing can start and stop on a dime---small changes to the first derivative aren't a big deal. *** Edited 5/19/2006 1:40:01 AM UTC by Brian Noble***

+0
Thursday, May 18, 2006 9:40 PM
Mole: I still don't agree. No film edit's would be necessary if intensity was diminished. All that would be necessary is to keep the same lengths of acceleration and decelleration. Example: If now they do a 7 second acceleration to 3 Gs, instead ,do a 7 second accelleration to 1.8 Gs or whatever. Intensity reduced, film kept the same.

Edit: Looks like Brian Noble beat me to it with a better explaination! *** Edited 5/19/2006 1:42:02 AM UTC by Peabody***

+0
Thursday, May 18, 2006 9:50 PM

The Mole said:
The G forces are created during acceleration

No, they're not. They're created when the centerfuge is rotating. A constant rotation yields a constant force (since you're always accelerating inward).


and by slowing down the centerfuge you'd have a shorter launch, thus meaning you'd have to edit the movie.

No, you'd just not spin the thing as fast.


Sorry about the headache earlier, I didn't mean that this plan would take long, instead that any change in the intensity of a spinning version of the ride would take a long time.

You're still wrong, though. ;)
+0
Friday, May 19, 2006 12:05 AM
Ok, I'll take it. Sorry for the problems. I hope my information can help.
+0
Friday, May 19, 2006 12:25 PM
Why am I just now seeing Brian's engineering-speak post? It's a damn good one.

As for the yawsense (new word!) I never felt it in any of my 11 "spins" on the ride. I honestly couldn't tell the difference between the 'fuge spinning up to 1G or being flat on my back, such as at the begining of the film when the shuttle reclines into the launch position.

Mole- I think the misunderstanding is coming from you confusing your linear motion physics stuff with your rotational motion physics stuff. We've got plenty of geeks around here who'd love to give you an amusment ride physics tutoring session! :)

+0
Friday, May 19, 2006 1:09 PM
<= And I am one of them. For instance:

John, you should be able to tell the difference between the 1G spin and lying on your back because when you spin you still have the 1G of normal gravity point downwards. Thus, you'd actually have a force magnitude of about 1.414 G pointed towards your butt. ;)

But I'm just being picky.

+0
Friday, May 19, 2006 2:08 PM
Well, yeah. That's what the vectors add up to, but when you're thinking so hard on whether or not the 'fuge is spinning up or you're tilting onto your back are *you* really gonna notice that .4G, especially when you don't have any points of reference? ;)

*** Edited 5/19/2006 6:15:10 PM UTC by Michael Darling***

+0
Friday, May 19, 2006 6:48 PM
Here is a report about it that aired on CNN. I don't think it stresses how safe the ride is enough, and makes the ride sound more stressing on the body than it actually is.

http://www.emailthis.clickability.com/et/emailThis?clickMap=viewThis&etMailToID=745418180
(You have to watch a commercial first)

+0
Friday, May 19, 2006 8:11 PM
^ Yeah, a large part of the *overhyping* about the forces still comes from the fact that this ios a DISNEY ride...for better *and* for worse, the rules for Disney ARE different.
+0
Saturday, May 20, 2006 1:21 AM
If this ride had been installed at Cedar Point, SFMM, or any other "thrill park" there wouldn't be any of the overhyping. All of the "OMFG it's so intense!!!one4" would be compliments, not "It's a death machine. Taer it down!"
+0
Saturday, May 20, 2006 1:35 AM
I'd bet that if Top Thrill Dragster or Tatsu were involved (even indirectly) with the deaths of two people, the media would be jumping all over those parks too. While the underlying facts--such as the parks having more visitors, and therefore, a greater chance that someone will die of pre-existing conditions--in the deaths are easily apparent to theme park junkies, all the person sitting in the newsroom sees is that someone died on the new attraction at Disney World. Sometimes we have to remember that the people writing the news are human--they find out that a ride killed two people, and then follow the story based on a natural conclusion: perhaps the ride is unsafe. I don't see why people keep acting like Disney is being unfairly treated... Disney is known around the world, people died on their rides, and it makes good news. Sometimes it helps put yourself in other people's shoes before pulling out the OMG DEATH MACHINE complaints.
+0
Saturday, May 20, 2006 3:52 AM
Hail CB Warriors!


Michael Darling said:
Why am I just now seeing Brian's engineering-speak post? It's a damn good one.

As for the yawsense (new word!) I never felt it in any of my 11 "spins" on the ride.


Same as flying a plane. There are two force vectors applied to the body, and the bodies "sensors".

Oh, and "ADD IN" the human brains reaction to "visual stimulation"; even WITHOUT force vectors applied to the spectator.

Why did Circle Vision "require" watching in-between close hand rails???

I'll put my wagering dollars that the Imagineers did NOT have the current data to represent how "wimpy" today's guest really is.

+0
Saturday, May 20, 2006 2:16 PM
It's funny because I was TRYING to tell when the 'fuge was spinning up and spinning down. I didn't feel any sideways acceleration at all. But, like you said, Sprig, without the visual cues the brain can be more easily fooled- even if you're looking for it.

That could be the same reason why the sit-to-lie for launch confused me, too. Though, the more I think about it, the more logical it is for the 'fuge to be spinning up then rather than going sit-to-lie because if it was going sit-to-lie then once the 'fuge spins up for launch there would have to be a lie-to-sit during the launch and that just screams of having to be over Imagineered to pull off so seamlessly.

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...